BUSH IS NOT A NAZI
"No one can terrorize a whole nation, unless we are all his accomplices." Edward R. Murrow
SeC is a paid agent provocateur. His sole purpose is to post on hundreds of sites what his clients pay him to post. It is just like placing biased info in any other media except it is the INTERNET. His personal agenda is one of Pan Europe and then Pan World in other words the NEW WORLD ORDER. He has every right to do this, but innocent readers should be aware that there is a definite agenda behind this poster. This agenda has its root in alchemy and paganism and is in no way Christian. You the reader need to know this and now you do. We are not arguing if he has the right to post here because, he does. We are warning you that his message is not what it appears to be.
09-14-2006, 07:50 PM
BUSH IS NOT A NAZI
He's a neo-bolshevik.
A probable unwitting accomplice of the East Coast Blue Blood Establishment who have worked for the U.K/European Banking houses for years.
Bush and the "neo cons" role is to take the heat for the coming economic collapse. By posing as an ultra right wing/nationalist/Christian party they ENERGISE the Left and give more ammunition for the socialist bankers to OUTLAW Religion.
When the end comes for the U.S economic system we will see a Left leaning saviour appear. ALL will be blamed on right wing Christians but NOT ONE PEICE of the totalitarian apparatus will be removed by the loving lackeys of the U.N and their Satanic banker sponsors.
What Is A Neo-conservative?
The exact opposite of a conservative. Neo-conservatives are the Bolsheviks of the Right. Like the Bolsheviks, they appear in restrained groups driven by a simple idology. They seek practical ways to acheive real power in order to make revoloutionary changes. These "practical ways" usually involve creating a misunderstanding over the "revoloutionary changes" to follow.
The first step in the advancement of a Bolshevik movement is the establishement of intellectual respectability. This was acheived by hiring bevies of academic consultants to lay out a marginal idea - that the West could revert to the rough capitalism of the 19th century - as if it were not only an historic nescessity but a natural inevitability. Their determinism literally mimmicked the Marxists. What a few years before had been marginal nonsense was now driven home as received wisdom by right wing newspaper columnists.
The second stage involved a series of coups d'etat within established conservative parties, beginning with those of Britian, the United States and Canada. The movement was then able to enter elections disguised as conservative renewal. They won power with the support of an electorate which would be among the first to suffer from their policies - the middle and lower middle classes.
The third step again mimmicked the Bolsheviks. This was the key to destabilising the opposition - including the now confused and captive conservatives - in order to win re-election. They redefined the political spectrum so that their marginal ideas occupied all of the territory from the extreme right to the center. This left many conservatives redefined as dangerous Liberals (the Wets, moderate Republicans and radical Tories). The Liberals suddenly resembled socialists and the socialists, communists. In other words, the great mainstream which had presided over the remarkable rise of the West was squeezed over to the marginal edge of public debate.
Since the essential characteristics of Neo-Conservatism are revoloutionary, it was perfectly natural for them to begin by disguising their actions behind reassuring phrases. What they believe is that wholesale change in structures is the only way to change society. Continuity, careful progress and memory are their enemy. However, to admit this in the early stages of holding power is to risk losing it. Eventually they felt free to turn on those who rejected their ideas of change and tar them as cowards.
With hindsite it can be seen that the movement was and remains a paradoxiacal mixture of silly abstract ideology andcrude self interest. The Neo-conservative recipe for public action seemed to have been drawn directly from that of Mussolini, which turned on praise of free enterprise, insistence on the need to reduce beauracracy, suggestions that unemployment relief was part of the economic problem, sotto voce hints that social inequalities should be increased not removed, and an aggressive foreign policy.
By the early 1990's they had so successfully redrawn the intellectual map that whenever Liberals returned to power they spent their time mouthing Neo-conservative formulae. At the same time, a growing number of political parties appeared who were openly corporatist or Mussolinian. Thanks to the respectability given their ideology by the Neo-conservatives they could present themselves as moderate conservative reformers. They began to make serious political inroads in Canada, the United States, Germany and, of course, Italy. There, three parties drawn from the Mussolini mould triumphed in the 1994 general elction. No Neo-conservative movements elswhere in the West expressed dispair or concern.
All of this explained why the Neo-conservatives treat cynicism as a sign of wisdom. It is not unreasonable to place them amongst the last true MArxists, since they believe in the inevitability of class warfare, which they are certain they can win by provoking it while they are in power.
John Raulston Saul. The Doubters Companion: A Dictionary Of Aggressive Common Sense. p.220
Though a rabid Secular Humanist, I cannot recommend Sauls books enough.
"The Unconscious Civilization".
vBulletin® v3.6.12, Copyright ©2000-2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.